Jump to content

User talk:Daedalus969/Archive 20

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22


Double-posting

If I don't seem to be responding, then it's not unreasonable to drop me a short note with a link. But please don't paste a duplicate of the full text. Dylan Flaherty 01:09, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

You have New Mesages

...at User talk:N419BH. I appreciate the note regarding your revert of my close. I have explained my reasons for said close there. N419BH 20:53, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

Destinero

I explicitly told Destinero, per your (and others) comments about making this clear to him/her. However, I wanted to drop you a note about constructive discussion; I think you over-reacted to the comments made and heated the situation by using the civility policy as part of the counter. Lets obtain some perspective; this dispute is over a single word, taking offence at the minor slight, demanding a retraction and then shooting it to AN/I asking for some sort of topic ban was a major over-reaction. I suggest [{WP:WQA]] for such issues in future (and, indeed, for issues such as this I recommend simply letting the words bounce off of you :)). As I recommended to Destinero; this is a somewhat silly dispute (I realise that is more down to Destinero than yourself) and suggest disengaging to a bit till it quiets down - then working on a simple (and quick) compromise. --Errant [tmorton166] (chat!) 09:52, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello there Daedalus: This is Nicholas Turnbull here, the enforcing administrator for Destinero's limited topic ban. I apologise that I wasn't able to comment on the AN/I discussion; I have been away working on a systems project, and it took place during that period of time.
First off, I would like to ask for your assistance in helping me to bring this rolling dispute to a close. I agree totally that Destinero's behaviour towards you has been uncivil. I believe your responses have, also, been uncivil, no matter how justified. I might point out that, if the actual article dispute has shifted to underlying civility issues rather than the nonsense about WP:UNDUE (which it seems to have done), we are, in fact, making progress. It isn't sensible to "fight fire with fire" when it comes to civility issues. I am sure that you have already noticed that Destinero is, in fact, a productive editor when 1) there is no POV issue at stake; and 2) there is nothing to keep him going in an extended argument. It is this latter, 2), that I need you to help me with; I have partly solved 1) by the ban that has been enacted, since Destinero's editing is now muzzled to prevent the majority of the issues that formerly would have caused him to be topic-banned entirely.
I am of the opinion that enacting a topic ban would make him more, and not less, belligerant; and, as such, would be the first step on a downward spiral to ArbCom. This nearly, but didn't quite, occur in the former Mediation Cabal LGBT parenting case, as Destinero -- in the final hour, as it were -- capitulated. I don't see any evidence to suggest a topic ban is either appropriate or necessary as, indeed, Destinero has adhered to the terms of his editing restrictions; frankly, if the only editing conflict left is about the inclusion of the word "consensus", I feel sure that Wikipedia (and the other article editors on the LGBT-related topics) will survive the blow. That an editor has editing restrictions against them does not increase the severity of sanctions for other matters, and the civility issues are not germane to the policy interpretation and POV matters that were the more serious problem.
So, will you help me here? When Destinero gets into the mode of posting huge, convoluted arguments full of links to sources, or does the whole lack of knowledge argument, etc.; could you simply, and unemotively, remind him to follow WP:CIVIL. That's all you need to do. Don't engage him in argument when he is being uncivil; don't be uncivil back. If he then persists, you may then request administrative enforcement. By engaging him in argument, you are making issues worse by making him be more argumentative back -- you do not solve a civility issue with a user by doing something likely to make them less civil. As I said, if in these limited circumstances Destinero continues not to adhere to civility standards, administrative enforcement may then be requested -- but it would be unfair and inappropriate at the present. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 17:22, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm frankly not sure if that is possible. The whole experience with that crap has frankly pushed me away from that article. I don't feel I want to edit there, if I have to deal with that level of incivility, and nothing is done about it.— Dædαlus Contribs 20:38, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
I'd say that's probably for the best. I hope that Destinero ultimately feels the same way and edits elsewhere also; the other option is that he will end up being banned entirely from Wikipedia. We will see what ultimately transpires. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 11:44, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

Re: 142.162.192.210 and his ilk

Hi - thanks for the message. I'm a little slow on the uptake, trying to get back into the deep end of the pool again after an extended break from really active editing, so I apologize for the mixup. At least now I know about it, so if you have trouble with this guy's socks again I can help you without much further discussion. I'm glad you found another admin to take care of it this time. If you need further help, don't hesitate to ask. :-) (And in case you're wondering, yes, your user page is still the special page. I looked at the bug report marked 'fixed' - the whole thing's wild, isn't it? Yowza.) Thanks again for the message. :-) - KrakatoaKatie 09:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Dædαlus Contribs 09:45, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Good grief - what a mess. 'How to Spread Your Interpersonal Problems Around The World In 5 Easy Steps' or something. If they keep doing this much longer I think the ban hammer might just come down. Disruption is disruption, you know? And they're certainly doing that. - KrakatoaKatie 09:56, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Replied on your talk page.— Dædαlus+ Contribs 10:50, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

+

Hi Daedalus, I clicked on the "+" button on your sig just to see where it went. It brought me here, which isn't working for me. Have you tried this URL instead? Airplaneman ✈ 03:28, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Hm. Thanks, I'll fix it right now.— Dædαlus+ Contribs 04:02, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

You Chung Hong

  • Did you read the text in the article? It reads "helping rebuild the community after it was relocated to accommodate the construction of Union Station in the 1930s" and "He designed a series of buildings on Gin Ling Way, one of which ultimately housed his legal office, and developed the main entrance gate on Broadway and its neon lighting". How can an editor can say "text does not support a picture of the east gate of Chinatown". Anyone knows Chinatown will tell you that the gates are the most important structure there. The photo was posted by creator of the article. Ucla90024 (talk) 23:36, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Time ago2

Template:Time ago2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. cymru lass (hit me up)⁄(background check) 01:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Tildes

For what it's worth, I learned about the tildes pretty quickly when I started here. What I still had a lot to learn about was NPOV and fair-use and such as that. Nor did I know anything about administrative pages such as ANI. I began to be exposed to those entities as issues inevitably began to arise. That's why I get suspicious of "new" users who seem to know too much. Perhaps that's a personal bias, though. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:01, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

IP warned for 3RR

I've warned him, but you need to watch it also as it's easy to get a block for this. Dougweller (talk) 11:14, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

Talkback

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at WikiCopter's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WikiCopter (radio • sorties • images • simplicity • lost • defense • attack) 00:46, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Accidental Comment Removal

Hey, what do you know? Perhaps Dylan's removal of LAEC's comment was inadvertent: witness this[1]. I don't personally see the greater value of restoring PrBeacon's comment (though it's up to you, and it seems like an accident): I think yet another WQA concerning civility would be "not well received". But, to be fair and even-handed, maybe it should go back in. Cheers :> Doc talk 09:49, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

That's way too specific to be a mistake. If it was an edit conflict, or an error in the software, the entire comment would be removed, not just a portion.— Dædαlus+ Contribs 09:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
I see now I did that, restoring.— Dædαlus+ Contribs 09:55, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Weird, right? I saw him make the comment, groaned to myself about the possibility of another WQA, and went to respond - but it was gone. I saw he didn't revert it, and then saw what happened. There must be some kind of a glitch, and like the other case, it was one minute apart. Odd. Cheers :> Doc talk 10:11, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Whenever I hit an edit conflict, I copy what I wanted to post, carefully back up and then repost wholly from scratch. Gwen Gale (talk) 10:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at Airplaneman's talk page.
Message added 14:35, 19 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re: Nuts, crazy, nonsense, insane...

Hello, I have replied to your message at User talk:Retro00064#Nuts, crazy, nonsense, insane..., in case you are interested. Regards. [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 00:51, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

Response

I have zero interest in pursuing this further, but as a conscientious editor I'm obliged to tell you I responded to your comments on my talk page. Please consider wikipedia policies and the best interest of the project in general before continuing down this path. Thanks! Kuguar03 (talk) 19:19, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Kuguar03 (talk) 00:14, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Koch

Why did you remove the tags? I justified them on the talk page. Multiple editors agreed with me. ANI said they shouldn't be removed. DF certainly shouldn't be removing them, especially when he never responded to my talk-page concern. THF (talk) 03:32, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Dædαlus+ Contribs 03:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Daedalus969 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 18:08, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

The guy files an SPI and then gets put in the stocks for a week good. There's a moral there someplace. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:19, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Smirnoff

"...page blocks you!" That's a good one. Can I use it? :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:58, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page; other than that, feel free to! :D — Dædαlus+ Contribs 20:03, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Done. An excellent addition to my collection of obscure quotes. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:12, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback in case you aren't watching my page :)

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at Mann jess's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jesstalk|edits 21:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

What do do?

I'm wondering if you would be willing to offer an opinion on this. It really puzzles me... the user most involved in those articles is trying to establish notability by sources such as [2] [3] [4]. He has a good point that the show has aired around the world. Yet, does that fact alone establish notability? Does it offer enough third party sources to make an article? BE——Critical__Talk 06:19, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Re the interaction ban between Mbz1 and yourself

Could you link / tell me what brought that about initially? un☯mi 22:02, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Dædαlus+ Contribs 22:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at Unomi's talk page.
Message added 22:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

OR on JR

I saw you say you like to look at OR problems. Would you mind taking a gander at possible OR on JR? --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 06:36, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Letting me know...

Well, actually whenever I say things in edit summaries I kind of expect them to be rhetorical questions, but thanks for the heads-up. Have a good holiday season, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 19:32, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

s:Wikisource

Hello, Daedalus. You have new messages at s:User talk:Daedalus969

forgot to sign ;) Gold Hat (talk) 18:06, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment

I would kindly ask that you close this as it has clearly served no purpose and is only inflaming the matter. AGF and move on, let it go and try not to interact with the editor again. I am not condoning nor condemning yours or the users actions I just think it would be better if we all moved on, Kind regards ZooPro 14:31, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's served no purpose because one of the involved editors hasn't found the time to comment on it. Until such time that they have, it isn't open, and is still pending. It isn't even transcluded anywhere. As all you have done in this dispute is so far refuse to talk to Kuguar about his behavior, it's hard to take anything you say as how you want it to be taken; you say you don't condone their behavior, yet your actions speak otherwise.— Dædαlus+ Contribs 21:33, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
You are very much mistaken in everything you have just said. I did comment on the behaviour and made suggestions. I find it highly insulting that you would consider my actions to be condoning any behaviour, I was and am a neutral third party. I find your current behaviour on par with Kuguar03's; you are assuming bad faith of me much the same way he/she did to you. ZooPro 13:55, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Not really. The fact of the matter is is that Ku still thinks they are in the right, and therefore the behavior will just repeat itself again. Just because they have 'dropped' one conflict, does not mean the spark that created the conflict has fizzled out. If an editor edit wars over material, and then never understands why 'everyone is telling them they were wrong to do so', they'll just do it again. There is no bad faith.— Dædαlus+ Contribs 20:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy, happy

Happy New Year, and all the best to you and yours! (from warm Cuba) Bzuk (talk) 15:53, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

How

Hey, how did you add the tags with the use of twinkle as you did here? Is there a twinkle button i missed? Someone65 (talk) 23:30, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

Thanks

Thanks for reverting me. I was just going to do the same thing, but you just beat me to it. I've realized that it's not the category that's the issue, but the attention his socks give. HeyMid (contribs) 10:30, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy tenth anniversary of Wikipedia!

File:Verre de whisky.jpg
Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia!

HeyMid (contribs) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{subst:User:HJ Mitchell/WikiScotch}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Message received at 22:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

Re: Notice regarding BLP

I do, and the link is dead, but I know this is true, because I've read the article. Wikipedia says to not remove sources just because links are dead, because as long as sourcing information is still there, it's still alright. The article went dead about a week ago, but a Google cache shows it still existed, and I am currently in the process of finding a physical copy of Blender. I really don't like that you didn't AGF here, Daedalus, or inquire about it. Yves (talk) 14:25, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 January 2011

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

The Signpost: 11 July 2011

The Signpost: 18 July 2011

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

The Signpost: 26 September 2011


The Signpost: 3 October 2011

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

Question

Would you like your talk page semi-d for a while? --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:37, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Dædαlus+ Contribs 21:41, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
done. also revdel'd a few edits. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:42, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank you.— Dædαlus+ Contribs 21:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

Membership of the Counter-Vandalism Unit

As you may know, the Counter-Vandalism unit is inactive. So for reviving the WikiProject, we will need to sort out the members. So if you are active, please put your username at the bottom of the list at Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism Unit#Sort out the members.

You are receiving this message as a current member of the CVU.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Counter-Vandalism Unit at 00:16, 30 October 2011 (UTC).

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

The Signpost: 7 November2011

The Signpost: 14 November 2011

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Daedalus969/Archive_20&oldid=1144753033"